The Times newspaper has apologised for publishing a false story claiming Qatar
was behind a multi-billion pound ‘Dream Football League’ offering £175
million to European clubs to compete.

Published last week, the story was then dismissed as a hoax by French media outlets, including the website Cahiers du Football, which published a spoof article earlier in the week containing some of the same detail as that published by the Times.

The Qatar Football Association denied being behind the plan and initially stood by its story. Times Football Editor Tony Evans told Reuters: "Oliver Kay is an exceptionally good journalist who is unlikely to have fallen for a hoax story on a spoof website.

"He obtained the information after speaking to powerful people in football and after doing his groundwork. He has been working on it for quite a while and there is no reason to doubt he will be fully vindicated."

But on Monday, Evans said the story “appears to have been invented” and had become “a journalistic nightmare”.

The acknowledgment came in an article by the Times’s Football Editor Tony Evans under the headline, “When we are wrong, we will hold our hands up. It's the right thing to do”.

Related Articles

Evans wrote that the information had come from a source who appeared to be connected with the Qatari ownership at Paris Saint-Germain, and had developed “an element of trust” with its reporter.

Evans said the Times had contacted “some of Europe's biggest clubs” and said half had not heard of the plan, while the other half had heard suggestions of something similar.

He added: “These secondary sources treated the questions seriously. And here is where the Times made a massive mistake. Because so many significant people in football did not laugh off the idea, it seemed that the story could be genuine.

“The warning signs – that no one had heard specific details of the DFL or seen its plans – were missed. In principle, the idea was possible. There were plenty to attest to that. In reality, the story appears to have been invented and had just enough plausibility to be seductive.

“Initially the Times launched a strong defence of the story and the reporter. However, the paper also launched an investigation by its internal ombudsman. Over the three days that followed the publication of the story, it appeared increasingly clear that... the paper had been duped. And that the checks from the office in London had not been stringent enough in the rush to publication.

“We value our reputation. There will be changes to the way we operate, and an extra level of scepticism will be incorporated into out working practices.”